It's a perfect movie. The art, the music, the recursive pacing, everything about this is composed absolutely perfectly. I don't remember if my expectations were high or low for it but it's so, so good.
I'd heard good things about the movie, and actually went in with reasonably high expectations of it, and it completely amazed me anyway. Just an incredible spectacle of a film.
I was going to say the same. It's a hard book to bring to the screen but damn they nailed it. The cinematography is phenomenal as well. I can't wait for part 2! The second half of the book is definitely more suited for a movie format than the first.
I've genuinely been trying to understand how people like the movie so much. The first time I watched it, I thought it was bad. So I came back to it a little while later and give it a second shot. Maybe I was just in a bad mood that day? Everyone seems to love it. Nope, still bad. Even gave it a third shot a few weeks ago and it felt even worse.
I read the first 3 books a few times, but I always try to put aside the source material when it moves to a new media. And the movie seemed to me like it was just a string of barely connected scenes, tied together solely because they shared characters. It was almost entirely just book references without trying to make a story out of them. It was entirely spectacle, and they still couldn't really get the scale right, which I think bugs me more than anything. It shows these giant buildings and ships that hint at vast crowds of people, and we only ever see a handful at a time on screen. Even "crowd" scenes are sparse. It feels like they're trying to make Arrakis feel giant and daunting to show the difference between the expansive dessert dwarfing crowds, then realized they didn't have the money for crowds so they just zoomed in on 4 people.
And they should have ended the story sooner. End with the climax battle and them getting to safety and save everything after for the next movie. Use that new time to actually get me invested in the characters, or the setting, or the story... anything. Make the first movie about palace intrigue as they know they're in danger and not sure who they can trust and gaining allies. Instead, all of that got like, one scene each and only makes sense if you've read the book. The best thing I can say is they put a tiny bit more effort in to showing Paul using the Voice before it's relevant to the story. So at least they cared enough about grounding that. Just not about literally anything else.
I desperately want someone to win me over and tell me what makes this a good movie. I feel like I'm missing something.
I think people only complained about the owlbear because everything else was so damn authentic. The lore, the feeling of a DnD session, the classes, etc.
And to top that of: It was just a good movie. Even for a non DnD player it is worth watching as a comedy/action movie.
Edit: I just realized that I saw John Wick based on, "Hey I want to see a movie today. John Wick? No idea what this is, but if it's in IMAX it might be fun!"
The new Puss In Boots. I went to see it mostly for my husband who likes Puss, but oh my goodness it was actually REALLY good. The animation was really interesting.
You beat me to this answer. I knew it was going to be good because of its phenomenal word of mouth and I was still surprised. There are so many cool details that no one will notice on a first watch, but show how much care the creators had for it. By way of example, Death can be seen in the crowd during the opening giant fight (he was there to witness each frivolous end, after all), and the numbered cards denoting each death have the silhouette of Death holding his shotels in the corners.
The New Jumanji. The first one, I never saw the second. I expected it to be a dumb, corny movie made just to fill the years reboot quota, but it was a VERY enjoyable movie.
Both Prey & Bullet train I was expecting average action movies, and both ended up being some of my favourite movies last year with great rewatchability.
Yeah. I signed up for a goofy explodey movie, and got a lot more in quality and fun and heart than I expected from "Free Guy". Even the science fiction premise details were far better researched than they needed to be.
Yeah. Pacific Rim was a breath of fresh air just to be getting a Yaeger/Kaiju movie at all. Then to watch it and discover it was made by a true fan of the genre, just fantastic.
I knew I was going to love Pacific Rim (giant robots and monsters? Sign me up) but I didnt expect the horror element of it and exactly how menacing each kaiju would be. I can easily rewatch it many times.
To the original question, from recent memory a film that surprised me was Dungeons and Dragons Honor among Thieves. The IP didnt have a great track record in film, but this one was entertaining, funny, heartwarming, and highly recommended.
At first Asteroid City got my attention with it's title. But after watching the movie I am amazed and wondering why are movies like this not more successful.
You really have to like Wes Anderson style. It's not for everyone. It's a niche taste to be honest. A few love Anderson peculiar movie style, but many despise it. I'm in the former group.
I feel like Wes Anderson films have been quite successful for a while. Maybe it didn't get the hype Barbenheimer got this go around, but Grand Budapest hotel won like 4 Oscars.
Check out lifeboat (1944) for a similar and exceptional film. It's directed by Hitchcock and also takes place entirely in a single scene. The basic concept is a u-boat sinks a merchant ship and the survivors in a lifeboat pick up one of the crew members of the u-boat that sank them. It's a great film and one I highly recommend.
Check out lifeboat (1944) for a similar and exceptional film. It's directed by Hitchcock and also takes place entirely in a single scene. The basic concept is a u-boat sinks a merchant ship and the survivors in a lifeboat pick up one of the crew members of the u-boat that sank them. It's a great film and one I highly recommend.
The Super Mario Bros Movie. I pretty much put it on expecting to be disappointed, as video game based movies are almost universally terrible, but ... I actually had a good time and really enjoyed all the reference humor.
Based on the trailers and ads, I thought Kung Pow was gonna be a piece of crap. I only went because my parents made me take my younger siblings who wanted to see it.
Turned out to be one of the funniest fucking movies I have ever seen.
Wolf of Wall Street. Mainly because I saw it on a whim pretty much as soon as it came out, and didn't really have any expectations. Holy fuck what an entertaining and hilarious film, three hours long and not a single boring minute. I've not seen it since but I consider it my favourite film regardless.
Demolition Man - I was expecting a dumb violent scifi action flick - which it was, but it also had a great scriptwriter and some really funny, witty lines in it which was an unexpected treat
Basically half of the films with Dwayne Johnson. Everytime I see a film with him I am like: "yeah, this won't be good, but at least funny", but some of them are really enjoyable
I just watched Oppenheimer. I went in with no expectations, but a solid grasp of the history (except I did not know Lewis Strauss's role in the clearance hearings, so that was good to learn).
I was deeply moved by the film. I have never conceptualized the person that Robert Oppenheimer was. Being a scientist working in the nuclear industry, I owe him a lot. And I find he was someone to look up to; and I also empathize with him as a person. I'm definitely not as brilliant as he was, but there are parallels between us personally and in our careers to date (albeit on a much smaller scale for me!). I understand the struggles he went through regarding his position on nuclear weapons. I believe he was someone who lived in contradiction (by seeing pros and cons to every stance, moral benefits and burdens) and was ok with living with the controversy internally... Much like quantum mechanics provides in general.
Keep in mind, the movie is a movie, not necessarily historically accurate. In order to present a more satisfying narrative, they breeze past some of the more contentious parts of the story, like how they acquired the farmland for the project and how many people died from preventable illness due to exposure to toxic elements and radiation.
I haven't seen it yet, but I expect it is an excellent film. You simply can't take it as the whole, honest truth.
I'm quite familiar with the history. I was quite surprised that they didn't tell the story of tickling the dragon's tail, for example, but I realized that wasn't the point being gone for. As an adult, I do know how to watch and interpret a film, but I am sure your comments are instructive for any children on Lemmy.
Not sure why you felt the need to try to invalidate my own feelings about the film - I wasn't asking for advice about it. I also find it a bit rich that you lecture me about the film when you haven't even watched it yourself.
I had low expectations because of the Zoom format of the movie. I expected it to be real cheesy and low quality.
But man, I was blown away. The Zoom video chat made the whole thing feel more real and once the scares started, they really didn't stop. It's only a 50 minute runtime, so it's short and sweet. Even when I knew what scares were coming, they still got me.
Frailty. Starring and directed by the late, great Bill Paxton. 20 years later this one still sticks with me. Best to go in without knowing anything about the plot.
Grosse Pointe Blank - I was expecting a cheesy action movie. That is in there, although it's a better than it has any right to be. And at the same time it manages to be a good romantic comedy. The script and the cast nail the human side of the story. (Except for Dan Akroyd, who I have never liked in anything.)
Not a movie, but digimon adventure 1. I loved it as a kid watching all the digimon fights. I watched it again later in life and it was even better when I noticed all the character development.
Mostly it's the ones I didn't hype for. Didn't watch trailers or knew any plot.
Like when I watched some of the IMDb top 250 just one by one without really looking what the movie is about except its setup (the Good the Bad the Ugly - Western, Twelve Angry Man - court case etc).
After big let down of suicide squad i stopped caring about trailers and now enjoy much more movies.
The movie 1917. I watched it going in blind. I knew it was praised by many, but then again, so are many other war movies. Now it's my favourite movie. I cannot help but cry at the scene in the basement, even thinking about it gives me goosebumps.
Rise of Skywalker - after the previous one, I expected to hate it, and was only seeing it to be done with the series. But I actually loved it.
I know it's goofy as hell, but it just felt like a proper Star Wars movie to me, it was fast, fun entertainment and it undid a lot of things I hated in Last Jedi.
I think that would fit the xkcd criteria for a positive unpopular opinion. I haven't checked rotten tomatoes though.
Personally, the only modern Star Wars movie that blew my socks off was Rogue One. All the rest were either ok, or, not that great. But RO was absolutely amazing.
I just looked it up, 86% audience score which is surprising to me because that movie is such a mess. I will stand with my 42% audience and say the last jedi was the best of that trilogy. At least it had a coherent plot and tried to make a new story.
But yes, Rogue One has a very good case for best Starwars movie out of them all.
I personally think that just almost every individual idea that was in the sequels were good ideas if taken on their own, it's just that none of them were really fleshed out enough or strung together in good ways. As a cohesive trilogy they fall kind of flat (and that may be too kind) but if you think of them more as a series of vignettes each part of them works pretty well IMO.
I think that's partly because Last Jedi took all the setup work of TFA, and tossed it contemptuously over its shoulder and off a cliff!
There was plenty to work with there, Rey beginning her journey with Luke, Luke troubled by the past, Snoke as a mysterious new villain, Kylo Ren as a bad guy wannabe who's torn by his conscience - but Rian Johnson (whom I really rate as a director in general, Brick and Knifes Out in particular) just tossed most of it aside, or undermined it.
That and the pointless casino planet episode, and the awful, awful humour ("Can you hear me now?" jokes? In Star Wars?) just brought it all to a shuddering halt IMO.
Then in the third film, JJA seemed to be trying to get things back on track a bit, but he was starting from such a bad position, it was always going to be a challenge.
From that point of view (which I know may not the universal one) I think Rise of Skywalker was a minor miracle.